Michael-Bay Movie Reviews

I'm not a western fan, but I enjoyed this movie! Country & western singer Willie Nelson does a great job portraying his villainy character, John Henry Lee, a person that tries to blow up a railroad. Former 70's teen rock idol Shaun Cassidy's acting has improved since his work as Joe Hardy on T.V.'s "Hardy Boys Mysteries", even though he still pursued his acting career after the show ended in T.V. and national theatre, and is now a T.V. producer and writer. He does fairly well playing a young gang leader named Cotton. For a T.V. movie, this is made on a good budget and still gets played on T.V. stations. Check it out if you see it advertise on your local T.V. listings!

I give Troll and "eh" rating.

It is a so-so fantasy story about a boy, named Harry Potter Jr., no less (played by Noah Hathaway) who discovers his sister is possessed by an evil troll (hence the movie's name).

June Lockhart shows up as a good witch who swears a lot, Sonny Bono plays a victim who is turned into an elf.

The Lord of the Rings it ain't!

You can tell when a sleaze film has hype by checking out the auction action, and the uncut DVD version of this is reaching 3 figures! No, it's not worth it, unless you're some kind of collector. But even a tape is a good acquisition for sex sleaze fans. There are several scenes for a compilation vid.

Let's see, first we got one of the mean witch finders cornering a girl in a bar and sticking a needle in her bare back. No nudity, but fairly realistic. Then we got a nude in a rack with various whip marks and such, having her footsies warmed up in full detail. There's a female whipping, but fully clothed, and too much cutting back and forth between the girl and the ugly face of the guy doing the whipping. We got two witch burning scenes, about as good as such things get, but no nudity. Oh yeah, I forgot, one girl is cured of talking too much, but it's more of a gore scene if you catch my drift.

That's it, I afraid, aside from wasted potential in the form of a nude sitting in a nail chair and being whipped, but oops . . . it's a guy!! Really bad call by the producers there. One star for the two burnings, one for the girl on the rack, one for the other scenes, but one star demotion for insufficient fast forward warning that you're checking out a male set of boo-toks. There. Want to pay full boat for two stars?

Total clip length worth saving; about a minute and a half. Wouldn't it be interesting to make one of these movies that had no plot at all, just a lot of realistic tortures? And no focusing on the priest dude holding a feather pen in his hand yelling for confessions either, makes editing the clip a pain. Ah well, they don't seem to be making these sleaze movies anymore. Maybe we could talk someone into making one about Uday, you know, current events being the cover? But no Olympic team stuff, please, let's stick to babes, eh?

The first thing that catches my attention about Mark Of The Devil is the opening sequence with the Morricone-like music that graces it. What I found to be disturbing was the fairy-tale like location and the sadism that visited. The town seems like a peaceful alpine Mayberry, but its denizens will sell each other out to the worst forms of torture at the drop of a hat to save their own skins, which as the point of this movie proves, are worthless. The real horror, and I do believe this was historically true, is the helplessness of everyone in this film to stop the events of witchfinding once they are set in motion. There is nothing more terrifying than for someone else to have complete control over your life-and Lom holds a whole village in his hand, end revels in being able to pull their strings and bring out the worst qualities of the helpless villagers.
Herbert Lom is adequate as the villain; he does a good job with his character's ability to barely conceal his Sadean lust. Udo Kier is also interesting as the ingenue. Granted where this film does begin to spin out of control is when the director tries to imbue his hero/heroine with a freewill choice of foiling Lom. Then it's time to suspend your belief for the remainder of the film. The ending almost redeems the original mood. All in all a pretty worthwhile see.

The first thing that catches my attention about Mark Of The Devil is the opening sequence with the Morricone-like music that graces it. What I found to be disturbing was the fairy-tale like location and the sadism that visited. The town seems like a peaceful alpine Mayberry, but its denizens will sell each other out to the worst forms of torture at the drop of a hat to save their own skins, which as the point of this movie proves, are worthless. The real horror, and I do believe this was historically true, is the helplessness of everyone in this film to stop the events of witchfinding once they are set in motion.
Herbert Lom is adequate as the villain; he does a good job with his character's ability to barely conceal his Sadean lust. Udo Kier is also interesting as the ingenue. Granted where this film does begin to spin out of control is when the director tries to imbue his hero/heroine with a freewill choice of foiling Lom. Then it's time to suspend your belief for the remainder of the film. The ending almost redeems the original mood. All in all a pretty worthwhile see.

JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU HAVE SEEN YOUR LAST OF SUCKY MOVIES..ONE, LIKE THIS REARS ITS UGLY, BLEACH BLONDE HEAD..WHEN WILL SOME PEOPLE START READING SCRIPTS, BEFORE COMMITING TO DO A MOVIE..I HOPE SOMEONE GOT FIRED OVER THIS FIASCO..IT ACTUALLY MAKES MOVIES LIKE "GRAFFITI BRIDGE" LOOK LIKE "ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE"....MADONNA, GO HOME!!!!!!!! GO TO SHANGHAI, GO ANYWHERE, BUT RUN FROM MOVIES LIKE THIS.., I ONLY GAVE THIS 1 STAR, BECAUSE THAT IS AS LOW AS ONE CAN GO..IN REALITY..ONE STAR IS ONE TOO MANY..SAVE YOUR MONEY, GO GET "SPINAL TAP" INSTEAD.

Make no mistake this film is dreadful. But you can't blame it all on Madonna's acting. The script is appallingly bad and the film cannot decide whether to be a romantic comedy or an Indiana Jones style action adventure. In the end it's neither, the budget just doesn't stretch that far. The scenery is nice though and Madonna does look stunning, even though she looks like she is bored stiff and is reading her lines from an autocue. The only intersting bit and redeeming quality this film has is Sean Penn's acting. He carries the film and the look of fondness he has for Madonna in the one-on-one scenes with her is obvious. She also shows signs of animation when she is acting one-on-one with Sean. Ah, if only she had remained married to him she might have been an Oscar winning actress by now. Or perhaps not! This film deserves to be seen for Sean's acting alone. So if you've got nothing planned and you want to watch a DVD that doesn't tax your brain too much then this is ideal. The soundtrack is good too - shame they never released it commercially.

This movie that starred Sean Penn and Madonna (who was the husband and wife team in the 1980s in real life)is not that bad, but it isn't great either, but it is watchable enough for a lot of people. It does have some areas that needs improvement and needs to be less choppy, like the scenes and conversations. The guy who kept popping up warning Sean Penn's character got on my nerves at times (I think it was his acting), but almost everyone did ok on their acting. It's more of an adventure than a romance and a couple of scenes can make you laugh. :) Overall, I enjoyed it.

I agree that the picture and sound quality of the Madacy DVD is poor, but I do find it watchable by turning up the contract and color on my TV. This film is in the public domain (copyright protection was lost) so Warner Brothers (Turner) will probably never spend the money to restore and release the film in a quality product. Where there is no copyright protection anyone can copy and sell the product. The print used to master the Madacy DVD was probably a 16mm dupe, the negative being made from another print causing the fuzzy generation loss. Finding a good original 16mm or 35mm Technicolor print to use for a master is next to impossible. Unless Turner feels it has enough of a market to warrant the expense of restoring and releasing an unprotected picture, we are stuck with what we get from public domain distributors. Maybe Criterion will come through once again.

There seems to be much confusion about the quality of this DVD release. I purchased it from this page and received a release from Alpha Video, although the information here says Gotham (are they the same ?). In any case the quality is quite acceptable to me. The picture is clear and the color is surprisingly good for the age of the picture. Also I found no problem whatever with the sound. It appears there is another version of this movie, from Madacy, which people may be confusing with this one. This version has no extras of any sort, and there are no claims of refurbishing. The movie itself of course is a classic.

This film has lost none of its appeal over the years. I remember loving it as a child and it still is one of my favorites. William Powell is a joy to behold as the overbearing yet loving Clarence Day Sr. And Irene Dunne gives what I consider to be one of her better performances. Elizabeth Taylor can do no wrong and is as adorable as ever. Fans of Adam-12 might not have noticed that the second son, John, is played by Martin Milner (who, co-incidentally, is in Mr. Roberts with William Powell, though sadly, not in any scenes together). As for the quality of the DVD, I found that my copy has two minor audio problems where the sound drops out entirely. Thankfully it is only for a short moment. Otherwise it is a wonderfully preserved movie, showing some of our finest actors at their best. LOVE IT!!! Five stars all the way!

Beautiful sets, lights, props and music were marred by English dubbing.... all of the German had been dubbed over, and there wasn't even any German in the subtitles. "Gebissen wird nur nachts," of course, means "Bites happen only at night" (one of those typical impersonal passive constructions that First Year German students run into. The English cover that came on this DVD was pretty good, as English goes ("The Vampire Happening"), but it wasn't what I expected. It wasn't until I opened up the DVD that I found the slip of paper with the original title - 'Gebissen wird nur nachts' - but where on earth did the German go? Why was this dubbed into English? Now, that said, this is not a total disappointment. It is what you would call 'soft-R' and not even 'soft-core.' A couple of scantily clad vampiresses are seen, and the plot was easy enough to follow. What I was struck with most with this film was the Disney-ish sound-track, a little more bouncy than "sound of music" but enough to remind me of the 1960's. If you are only into rap music, or rock, this soundtrack will probably strike you as rather lame. I think most of the value behind this DVD rests in what lessons it teaches the film student who looks at it from the perspective of how to put a movie together. It's a good enough movie if you can get past the English, which proceeds at odds with the movement of the lips of the actors. Sigh. Film collectors that want to follow the career of Pia Degermark might also find this movie valuable. But beware, ordering "Gebissen wird nachts" means getting "The Vampire Happening" when the DVD finally arrives in your mailbox. And there were no menu choices that you could click to turn on any German, not even German subtitling. I sure hope that ordering "Der Blaue Engel" or "Kleider Machen Leute" doesn't mean getting "The Blue Angel" or "Clothes Make the Man" when the DVD finally arrives in the mailbox.

Ok, I'll admit the picture on the dvd package made me buy this dvd. I must say, I didn't know what to expect. It was like a parody of a horror movie by Benny Hill. It was however, atmospheric, the scenery and music gave it a foreign feel. The story is a bit strange though, but if you don't take it too seriously, you'll have fun with it. This wouldn't win any awards, but I intend on keeping it in my collection just as a novelty.

Explosions! Gun battles! Bronson under-acting! Ireland over-acting! This movie has it all! Except a believable plot. Actually has an intriguing premise; with a little development it would have made good movie. But every time Bronson gets close to someone who might have some answers he blows them away (read as "man of action") and Ireland refuses to see anyone but Bronson as a threat (read as "dumb blonde"). Fine, except for an abrupt reversal of these endearing traits halfway through the film. And of course their clumsy attempts to escape mayhem at the hands of bad guys that come out of NOWHERE (and everywhere) begs the great philosophical question: when Wiley Coyote is being chased by a train, why doesn't he just step off the tracks? As mindless action goes, it's not a bad flick; although rumor has it that the animators at Disnry passed on it, and left the producers scrambling for the appropriate actors to play the leads. Then came...Bronsons.

Charles Bronson plays a Secret Service Agent assigned to protect the First Lady, who is played with snootily comic verve by his real life wife Jill Ireland. When Mrs. President becomes the target of an assassination conspiracy Bronson takes her undercover (no, not like that), dodging bullets as he tries to find clues as to who is behind it all. Nothing special, just painless fun for die hard Bronson fans.

The films of Mr. Charles Bronson require a different rating scale than other movies. This is why I previously granted "Death Wish 3" five stars. I'm not saying it compares to "Singin' In the Rain" or "Mean Streets" or "Nashville" but as far as Bronson films go, it's vital. This one not so much, though if you thought the "casting couch" had vanished in the late 80's, get a load of the gal who plays Charlie's young girlfriend! This is certainly no "In the Line of Fire" but it's short and stuff blows up. I remember when this was released theatrically and Mr. Bronson and his late wife Ms. Ireland were on TV plugging it. Charlie voiced his dislike of the extreme violence in "Death Wish 3" (i.e., the tons of violent footage Michael Winner added to the climactic scenes). Shame he didn't recognize the movie for the masterwork it has become.

I have great respect for playwright David Hare, and I'm a big fan of Blair Brown (and Bridget Fonda too, for that matter), but despite the engaging performances of these two actresses, this movie goes nowhere, slowly. Bruno Ganz's character is too cryptic, and his performance too expressionless, to ever provide any suggestion of real love between the two leading characters. Ms. Brown plays a doctor who is smart enough to run from the altar once; but she later goes through with it just because her shiftless sister calls her a coward. Later, when he disappears and she starts paying off his gambling debts, she seems foolish, not loyal. Reviews of this film talk a lot about the political significance of the story and its commentary on Thatcherism and single women, but those writers must have gotten that mumbo-jumbo from a press release, 'cause it ain't on the screen.

This obtuse romantic drama from writer/director playwright David Hare is a major misfire after his debut with Wetherby and the underrated Paris by Night. Anyone that knows Hare as a playwright, knows that he specialises in doomed relationships, which was a feature of both Wetherby and Plenty. It is said that Plenty came out of Hare's real life relationship with actress Kate Nelligan who did the London and Broadway runs but lost the film role to Meryl Streep. It is said too that this film is Hare's paean to Blair Brown who won hearts on her cable TV series The Days and Nights of Molly Dodd. However while Fred Schepisi made Streep look great in Plenty but failed to help her overcome her basic miscasting, Hare as director does the opposite for Brown, by lighting her unflatteringly but still managing to let us see her skill as an actor. Like Susan Traherne in Plenty, Brown's American doctor living in England is meant to be emotionally fragile and therefore vulnerable to the exotic gambler "Mr Forbes" (Bruno Ganz) who urges her to "jump" in his use of horse metaphors. Hare likes his portents, giving Brown a terminal patient, so when Brown meets Ganz gazing at a crucifix with him picking up her dropped handerkerchief, things don't bode well for them, (the handkerchief is a particularly corny touch), and having a sign at a registry office "No rice or confetti is to be thrown on council premises". Hare's screenplay is lumbered with lines that are embarassing for a playwright of his stature, like "I'm totally in love with you and old enough to know I always will be", "I don't have it in me to have a baby", "He was running on empty", "He went to the heart of me", and "You have certain feelings and then you have to pick up the bill". This is the kind of movie where someone flees to a storeroom for solace and gets a succession of visitors, and being set in England, where a cup of tea is the answer to all problems. The setup actually comes across as a conceit that might work better on the stage than in film, highlighted by the explaination of the title with models dressing in hospital curtained spaces. Hare continues his misuse of over-orchestrated music that blighted Wetherby, even beginning the film with Nat King Cole's syrupy version of When I Fall in Love. The best scenes involve Bridget Fonda as Brown's sister, even if Fonda's character is the irresponsible uninhibited free spirit that Brown is not. (Since she is Brown's sister, we know Brown has the potential). It's a pity that Fonda is used as a character obstacle when she is the most likeable of the actors. Hare's only resonant image is a couple to be married, she in yellow and he in blue, each with an arm behind the other, as if the colours will merge into green at any moment. And he even denies us the sight of the models parading their strapless gowns in the fashion show fundraiser that ends the film. Instead he freezes behind the back of someone about to enter the catwalk.

Hare creates a man who insists on the romance that comes with falling in love to be the essence of BEING in love. His women fail him because, in despair, ``I don't need all these presents. Don't you understand? You've GOT me; we're married''. Hare fails his women because of his extravagant, reckless, obsessive focus on the relationship. Brown finally accepts him as-is, & he rejects falling in love anew and reverses, returning to her. Strapless gowns at a charity benefit are the metaphor for Brown's recognition that their love requires her to stand on her own, to have the strength to accept his love, however unusual. (This was written spontaneously and will be replaced by a more rational review.) The film needs a wider audience. The opening credits triptych is worth the price of admission alone (Nat King Cole's ``When I Fall In Love'').

I have great respect for playwright David Hare, and I'm a big fan of Blair Brown (and Bridget Fonda too, for that matter), but despite the engaging performances of these two actresses, this movie goes nowhere, slowly. Bruno Ganz's character is too cryptic, and his performance too expressionless, to ever provide any suggestion of real love between the two leading characters. Ms. Brown plays a doctor who is smart enough to run from the altar once; but she later goes through with it just because her shiftless sister calls her a coward. Later, when he disappears and she starts paying off his gambling debts, she seems foolish, not loyal. Reviews of this film talk a lot about the political significance of the story and its commentary on Thatcherism and single women, but those writers must have gotten that mumbo-jumbo from a press release, 'cause it ain't on the screen.

This obtuse romantic drama from writer/director playwright David Hare is a major misfire after his debut with Wetherby and the underrated Paris by Night. Anyone that knows Hare as a playwright, knows that he specialises in doomed relationships, which was a feature of both Wetherby and Plenty. It is said that Plenty came out of Hare's real life relationship with actress Kate Nelligan who did the London and Broadway runs but lost the film role to Meryl Streep. It is said too that this film is Hare's paean to Blair Brown who won hearts on her cable TV series The Days and Nights of Molly Dodd. However while Fred Schepisi made Streep look great in Plenty but failed to help her overcome her basic miscasting, Hare as director does the opposite for Brown, by lighting her unflatteringly but still managing to let us see her skill as an actor. Like Susan Traherne in Plenty, Brown's American doctor living in England is meant to be emotionally fragile and therefore vulnerable to the exotic gambler "Mr Forbes" (Bruno Ganz) who urges her to "jump" in his use of horse metaphors. Hare likes his portents, giving Brown a terminal patient, so when Brown meets Ganz gazing at a crucifix with him picking up her dropped handerkerchief, things don't bode well for them, (the handkerchief is a particularly corny touch), and having a sign at a registry office "No rice or confetti is to be thrown on council premises". Hare's screenplay is lumbered with lines that are embarassing for a playwright of his stature, like "I'm totally in love with you and old enough to know I always will be", "I don't have it in me to have a baby", "He was running on empty", "He went to the heart of me", and "You have certain feelings and then you have to pick up the bill". This is the kind of movie where someone flees to a storeroom for solace and gets a succession of visitors, and being set in England, where a cup of tea is the answer to all problems. The setup actually comes across as a conceit that might work better on the stage than in film, highlighted by the explaination of the title with models dressing in hospital curtained spaces. Hare continues his misuse of over-orchestrated music that blighted Wetherby, even beginning the film with Nat King Cole's syrupy version of When I Fall in Love. The best scenes involve Bridget Fonda as Brown's sister, even if Fonda's character is the irresponsible uninhibited free spirit that Brown is not. (Since she is Brown's sister, we know Brown has the potential). It's a pity that Fonda is used as a character obstacle when she is the most likeable of the actors. Hare's only resonant image is a couple to be married, she in yellow and he in blue, each with an arm behind the other, as if the colours will merge into green at any moment. And he even denies us the sight of the models parading their strapless gowns in the fashion show fundraiser that ends the film. Instead he freezes behind the back of someone about to enter the catwalk.

Hare creates a man who insists on the romance that comes with falling in love to be the essence of BEING in love. His women fail him because, in despair, ``I don't need all these presents. Don't you understand? You've GOT me; we're married''. Hare fails his women because of his extravagant, reckless, obsessive focus on the relationship. Brown finally accepts him as-is, & he rejects falling in love anew and reverses, returning to her. Strapless gowns at a charity benefit are the metaphor for Brown's recognition that their love requires her to stand on her own, to have the strength to accept his love, however unusual. (This was written spontaneously and will be replaced by a more rational review.) The film needs a wider audience. The opening credits triptych is worth the price of admission alone (Nat King Cole's ``When I Fall In Love'').

1986 sequal to the terrible 1976 remake, finds Linda Hamilton and a bunch of scientists revive Kong with a new mechannal heart, then they find a Lady Kong and the two have a son, all the while the military wants all the apes dead. It really is a cheesy movie with bad effects work. Two actors in terrible ape suits. A lousy music score and terrible acting by everyone. Thankfully they never followed it up with another movie. It's not a key with the recent Godzilla movie that put a supernatural take on the Big G. Bleeech.

"King Kong Lives" is so boring that even pre-schoolers will probably get up and wander out of the room on this one to go play with a cardboard box or something really fun. It is one thing to make a sequel to a splatter flick where Michael/Jason/Freddy constantly comes back from the dead, but another thing to try and put the same trick with King Kong. Thousands of people die around the world each year because of heart attacks, but working on an artificial heart for a 50-foot ape who has been in a coma for ten years seemed like a good idea to heart specialist Amy Franklin (Linda Hamilton). Meanwhile, in the jungles of Borneo big game hunter Hank Mitchell (Brian Kerwin) finds a female Kong. This is good news because she can provide the blood Kong needs during the operation (let us all think about the world's biggest by-pass machine). Amy falls for Hank because they have so much in common, while the two apes do the same. Needing privacy, Kong and his love flee into the woods where the Army proceeds to hunt them down. The movie makes it seem like it only took the army a couple of days to hunt down two 50-foot apes running loose in the wild, but it must have been many, many months because when the Army catches up with them the female Kong is in labor.

This movie is jaw-droppingly bad. But given that Jessica Lange survived the original "King Kong" remake and Linda Hamilton had some success after this turkey, there is really no reason for any young actress to ever turn a role in one of these films, no matter how bad the script. King Kong's leading ladies do pretty well. The gap between the original "King Kong" and the remake is certainly a lot closer than "King Kong Lives" and the original sequel, "Son of Kong." Sure, that one had the mystery of where was Frau Kong all this time, but that giant hole is nothing compared to the rampant stupidity in this one. The person I respect after watching this film would have to be Margaret Mitchell, who avoided having a sequel to "Gone With the Wind" for half a century. Way to go Mrs. Peggy Marsh!

Pointless sequel, they should have left poor King Kong dead. Linda Hamilton (along with a bunch of other doctors) brings ol' King Kong back to life, but this time... somewhere in some jungle, they find Lady Kong, whom they drag to the US... then a strange romance unveils between both Kongs... and on and on.
I'm not surprised why they didn't do a follow up to this one.
Average special effects, but this movie has a haunting musical score.